Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
![(A) The raw image of core in the Eocene Xiaganchaigou Formation from the vertical well B1, Shizigou oil field, limestone; depth, 4175.6 m (13,699.5 ft). (B) The image with superimposed annotation showing the relationship between fractures and faults. The early and later reverse faults are marked by F1 (solid line) and F2 (dashed line), respectively. The dashed rings mark regions with fractures. Letter a indicates an early fracture zone formed at the tip of F1; letter B, later fracture zone formed at the tip of F2. Fractures are filled with calcite in both regions. See Figure 5 for the well location.]()
![Microfractures of the Eocene Xiaganchaigou Formation in a horizontal thin section from the B2 well, Shizigou oil field. The host rock is lacustrine limestone; depth, 4102 m (13,458 ft). F = earlier fracture filled with gypsum that has been dissolved as fracture filled with crude oil. See Figure 5 for the well location.]()
![Microfractures of the Eocene Xiaganchaigou Formation in a horizontal thin section from the B2 well, Shizigou oil field. The host rock is lacustrine limestone; depth, 4122.8 m (13,526.2 ft). Early fractures filled with calcite and gypsum have been broken by neotectonic uplift or abnormally high fluid pressure and became open fractures filled with crude oil. The host rock is lacustrine limestone. See Figure 5 for the well location. Fa indicates early fracture set 1; Fb, later fracture set. C = fracture-filling calcite; G = fracture-filling gypsum; P = porosity.]()
![(A) Regional seismic section I and (B) related geological interpretation, showing that, in addition to steep basement-involved faults, décollement folds and faults are common and associated with a major décollement in the Upper Xiaganchaigou Formation and a minor one in the Lulehe Formation. (C) Details of the décollement in the Upper Xiaganchaigou Formation. (D, E) Details of growth strata in the Shizigou and Honggouzi anticlines, respectively. TWTT—two-way traveltime; GS—growth strata. Section location is shown in Figure 3.]()
![Field photographs of lithofacies and stratigraphic units at the Dahonggou section. Stratigraphic levels refer to Figure 6. (A) Erosive, laterally continuous conglomerate beds interbedded with structureless mudstone and sandstone. Lulehe Formation, 480 m. (B) Interbedded sandstone and mudstone. Sandstone package thickness and frequency increase upward. Xiaganchaigou Formation, 1940 m. (C) Structureless, red and green mottled mudstone. 1–10 cm beds of ripple cross-stratified and horizontally laminated fine-grained sandstone increase in thickness up to a sharp contact with trough cross-stratified medium-grained sandstone bed. Xiaganchaigou Formation, 2970 m. (D) Thick package of trough cross-stratified sandstone capped by interbedded mudstone and sandstone. Xiaganchaigou Formation, 3200 m. (E) Trough cross-stratified pebble conglomerate and medium- to coarse-grained sandstone. Shangyoushashan Formation, 5965 m. (F) Amalgamated trough cross-stratified sandstone overlying laminated red mudstone. Lulehe Formation, ∼50 m. (G) Interbedded coarse-grained cross-bedded sandstone and clast-supported pebble conglomerate, Lulehe Formation, 489 m. (H) Structureless to laminated red mudstone incised by trough cross-stratified clast-supported pebble conglomerate. Lulehe Formation, 815 m. (I) Two amalgamated channel complexes separated by interbedded sandstone and mudstone. Xiaganchaigou Formation, 2800 m. Up section is to the right. (J) Bidirectional current ripple cross-stratification. Shangganchaigou Formation, 4523 m. (K) Upward-coarsening packages of sandy siltstone to fine sandstone. Shangganchaigou Formation, 3659.7 m. (L) Horizontally bedded clast-supported pebble-cobble conglomerate interbedded with coarse- to very coarse-grained sandstone. Shangyoushashan Formation, 5603 m.]()
![Field photographs of lithofacies and stratigraphic units at the Dahonggou section. Stratigraphic levels refer to Figure 6. (A) Erosive, laterally continuous conglomerate beds interbedded with structureless mudstone and sandstone. Lulehe Formation, 480 m. (B) Interbedded sandstone and mudstone. Sandstone package thickness and frequency increase upward. Xiaganchaigou Formation, 1940 m. (C) Structureless, red and green mottled mudstone. 1–10 cm beds of ripple cross-stratified and horizontally laminated fine-grained sandstone increase in thickness up to a sharp contact with trough cross-stratified medium-grained sandstone bed. Xiaganchaigou Formation, 2970 m. (D) Thick package of trough cross-stratified sandstone capped by interbedded mudstone and sandstone. Xiaganchaigou Formation, 3200 m. (E) Trough cross-stratified pebble conglomerate and medium- to coarse-grained sandstone. Shangyoushashan Formation, 5965 m. (F) Amalgamated trough cross-stratified sandstone overlying laminated red mudstone. Lulehe Formation, ∼50 m. (G) Interbedded coarse-grained cross-bedded sandstone and clast-supported pebble conglomerate, Lulehe Formation, 489 m. (H) Structureless to laminated red mudstone incised by trough cross-stratified clast-supported pebble conglomerate. Lulehe Formation, 815 m. (I) Two amalgamated channel complexes separated by interbedded sandstone and mudstone. Xiaganchaigou Formation, 2800 m. Up section is to the right. (J) Bidirectional current ripple cross-stratification. Shangganchaigou Formation, 4523 m. (K) Upward-coarsening packages of sandy siltstone to fine sandstone. Shangganchaigou Formation, 3659.7 m. (L) Horizontally bedded clast-supported pebble-cobble conglomerate interbedded with coarse- to very coarse-grained sandstone. Shangyoushashan Formation, 5603 m.]()
![(continued). (A) Isopach map of the Lulehe Formation (E1+2). (B) Isopach map of the lower Xiaganchaigou Formation (E3-1). (C) Isopach map of the upper Xiaganchaigou Formation (E3-2). (D) Isopach map of the Shanggan-chaigou Formation (N1). (E) Isopach map of the Xiayoushashan Formation (N2-1). (F) Isopach map of the Shangyoushashan Formation (N2-2). (G) Isopach map of the Shizigou Formation (N2-3). (H) Isopach map of Quaternary sediments (Q). See Table 1 for age assignment of each unit.]()
![Comparison diagram of the thickness-distance (T-D) plots and corresponding hinge points of each period (see Fig. 6A for locations). The vertical and horizontal axes indicate the normalized thickness (TN) and distances away from the basin margin (ATF), respectively. TN is obtained following the equation TN = (T–TMin)/(TMax–TMin), where T, TMax, and TMin represent the true, the maximum, and the minimum strata thicknesses in a certain period, respectively. Eroded portions are marked as dotted lines. The shaded blue and gray areas are used to highlight the tendencies of the T-D curves during the stages of the Upper Xiaganchaigou–Xiayoushashan formations and the Shangyoushashan–Shizigou formations, respectively. 1—Lulehe Formation (LLH); 2—Lower Xiaganchaigou Formation (LXG); 3—Upper Xiaganchaigou Formation (UXG); 4—Shangganchaigou Formation (SG); 5—Xiayoushashan Formation (XY); 6—Shangyoushashan Formation (SY); 7—Shizigou Formation (SZG). It is evident that the hinge points are located relatively farther away (by >10 km) from the Altyn Tagh fault on the major anticline belts after ca. 15 Ma compared to the previous stage (panels A, B, and D).]()
![Sketches showing the deposition of the three décollement layers and the associated influence on deformation in the Qaidam Basin interior. (A) Deposition of fine-grained mudstone and siltstone of the Lulehe Formation in a subbasin confined by basement faults and marginal uplift (A1). In the depositional period of the Xiayoushashan to Shangyoushashan Formations (ca. 11–5.8 Ma), continuous NE-SW shortening induced ductile flow (A2), resulting in the development of some décollement anticlines (such as the Dafengshan and Nanyishan anticlines). These anticlines created some other small subbasins with deposition of fine-grained mudstone (A3). During the deposition of the Shizigou-Qigequan Formations, NE-SW shortening was intensified, and some detachment thrusts soling into the Shangyoushashan Formation developed to form the fault-propagation folds observed at the surface (A4). (B) Some preexisting faults such as the Alar, Niuzhong, and Niubei faults became active, creating some subbasins within the basin (B1). The fine-grained mudstone with evaporites of the Upper Xiaganchaigou Formation was deposited in a subbasin confined by basement faults (B2). After fast burial by subsequent deposition of the Shangganchaigou-Xiayoushashan Formations that generated an overpressure environment, some anticlines developed by the thrusts soling downward into the Upper Xiaganchaigou décollement under continuous tectonic loading (B3). Intense deformation occurred, but it was decoupled by the weak layer in the Upper Xiaganchaigou Formation (B4). Please see Table 1 for stratigraphic unit symbols. Formation abbreviations as in Figure 13.]()
![Stratigraphy, lithologic unit descriptions, sedimentary facies, and source–reservoir–cap rock assemblages of the Yingxiongling range. The Cenozoic stratigraphy of the basin has been defined and dated in detail using magnetostratigraphy, palynology, and paleontology studies within the entire basin. Source–reservoir–cap rock assemblages are adapted from Zeng et al. (2012). E1+2l = Lulehe Formation; E31xg = Lower Xiaganchaigou Formation; E32xg = Upper Xiaganchaigou Formation; J1+2d = Dameigou Formation; J3c = Caishiling Formation; Kq = Quanyagou Formation; N1sg = Shangganchaigou Formation; N21xy = Xiayoushashan Formation; N22sy = Shangyoushashan Formation; N23s = Shizigou Formation; Q1q = Qigequan Formation; Q2–4 = Dabuxun-Yanqiao Formation.]()
![Ternary diagrams of sandstone petrographic data. Light-gray arrow highlights an up-section decrease in maturity between the Shangganchaigou and Xiaganchaigou Formations, followed by a return to more mature sandstone compositions between the Xiaganchaigou and Shangyoushashan Formations. Fields for the leftmost ternary diagram are from Folk (1980). Ternary diagrams were created using Ternplot (Zahid and Barbeau, 2011).]()
![Gridded isopach maps of the Cenozoic stratigraphic units. (A) Lulehe formation (LLH). (B) Lower Xiaganchaigou formation (LXG). (C) Upper Xiaganchaigou formation (UXG). ATF—Altyn Tagh fault. Insets show the typical thickness-distance plot extracted from the corresponding isopach maps, with hinge points highlighted by small rectangles and thickness increasing to the right. The upper ends of the numbered T-D curves in the insets correspond to the northwestern ends of the numbered lines shown in the corresponding panel. Note that these isopach maps are not corrected for decompaction. Red solid lines indicate the maximum erosional extents. Blue dots are hinge points. Blue solid lines represent boundaries of the Altyn Slope in different depositional stages, while the black solid line is the current boundary. Y—Yiliping depression; M—Mang’ai depression; O—Old Mang’ai depression; J—Jinhongshan depression; N—Niubei depression. (D) Shangganchaigou formation (SG). (E) Xiayoushashan formation (XY). (F) Shangyoushashan formation (SY). (G) Shizigou formation (SZG).]()
![Gridded isopach maps of the Cenozoic stratigraphic units. (A) Lulehe formation (LLH). (B) Lower Xiaganchaigou formation (LXG). (C) Upper Xiaganchaigou formation (UXG). ATF—Altyn Tagh fault. Insets show the typical thickness-distance plot extracted from the corresponding isopach maps, with hinge points highlighted by small rectangles and thickness increasing to the right. The upper ends of the numbered T-D curves in the insets correspond to the northwestern ends of the numbered lines shown in the corresponding panel. Note that these isopach maps are not corrected for decompaction. Red solid lines indicate the maximum erosional extents. Blue dots are hinge points. Blue solid lines represent boundaries of the Altyn Slope in different depositional stages, while the black solid line is the current boundary. Y—Yiliping depression; M—Mang’ai depression; O—Old Mang’ai depression; J—Jinhongshan depression; N—Niubei depression. (D) Shangganchaigou formation (SG). (E) Xiayoushashan formation (XY). (F) Shangyoushashan formation (SY). (G) Shizigou formation (SZG).]()
![Gridded isopach maps of the Cenozoic stratigraphic units. (A) Lulehe formation (LLH). (B) Lower Xiaganchaigou formation (LXG). (C) Upper Xiaganchaigou formation (UXG). ATF—Altyn Tagh fault. Insets show the typical thickness-distance plot extracted from the corresponding isopach maps, with hinge points highlighted by small rectangles and thickness increasing to the right. The upper ends of the numbered T-D curves in the insets correspond to the northwestern ends of the numbered lines shown in the corresponding panel. Note that these isopach maps are not corrected for decompaction. Red solid lines indicate the maximum erosional extents. Blue dots are hinge points. Blue solid lines represent boundaries of the Altyn Slope in different depositional stages, while the black solid line is the current boundary. Y—Yiliping depression; M—Mang’ai depression; O—Old Mang’ai depression; J—Jinhongshan depression; N—Niubei depression. (D) Shangganchaigou formation (SG). (E) Xiayoushashan formation (XY). (F) Shangyoushashan formation (SY). (G) Shizigou formation (SZG).]()
![Fig. 3.]()
![Representative seismic profile B–B′ across the northern Qaidam basin. (A) Uninterpreted. (B) Interpreted. The location of this seismic profile is shown in Figure 3. Q—Quaternary; SZ—Shizigou Formation; SY—Shangyoushashan Formation; XY—Xiayoushashan Formation; SG—Shangganchaigou Formation; XG—Xiaganchaigou Formation; LL—Lulehe Formation; K—Cretaceous; J—Jurassic.]()
![Lithological composition of the salt layer shows the proportional variation of the three salt types with depth. E32xg = Upper Xiaganchaigou Formation.]()
![Stratigraphy of the Dahonggou Section of the Qaidam Basin, northeast Tibetan Plateau, correlated to the recent magnetostratigraphic ages of Wang et al. (2017). GPTS—geomagnetic polarity time scale (Hilgen et al., 2012); VGP—virtual geomagnetic polarity; SZG—Shizigou Formation; SYSS—Shangyoushashan Formation; XYSS—Xiayoushashan Formation; SGCG—Shangganchaigou Formation; XGCG—Xiaganchaigou Formation.]()
![Structural cross section based on surface geology and seismic data. The line location is shown in Figure 1B. , Paleocene Lulehe Formation; , Eocene Xiaganchaigou Formation; , Oligocene Shangganchaigou Formation; , Miocene Xiayoushashan Formation; , Miocene Shangyoushashan Formation; , Pliocene Shizigou Formation and Pleistocene Qigequan Formation.]()
![(A) Uninterpreted and (B) interpreted versions of a three-dimensional seismic section across the northern Shizigou salt structure. See Figure 5 for location. E32 = Upper Xiaganchaigou Formation; N1 = Shangganchaigou Formation; N21 = Xiayoushashan Formation.]()
1-20 OF 77 RESULTS FOR
Xiaganchaigou Formation
Results shown limited to content with bounding coordinates.
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
1
Image
(A) The raw image of core in the Eocene Xiaganchaigou Formation from the ve... Available to Purchase
in The influence of fracture cements in tight Paleogene saline lacustrine carbonate reservoirs, western Qaidam Basin, northwest China
> AAPG Bulletin
Published: 01 November 2012
Figure 13 (A) The raw image of core in the Eocene Xiaganchaigou Formation from the vertical well B1, Shizigou oil field, limestone; depth, 4175.6 m (13,699.5 ft). (B) The image with superimposed annotation showing the relationship between fractures and faults. The early and later reverse faults
Image
Microfractures of the Eocene Xiaganchaigou Formation in a horizontal thin s... Available to Purchase
in The influence of fracture cements in tight Paleogene saline lacustrine carbonate reservoirs, western Qaidam Basin, northwest China
> AAPG Bulletin
Published: 01 November 2012
Figure 19 Microfractures of the Eocene Xiaganchaigou Formation in a horizontal thin section from the B2 well, Shizigou oil field. The host rock is lacustrine limestone; depth, 4102 m (13,458 ft). F = earlier fracture filled with gypsum that has been dissolved as fracture filled with crude oil
Image
Microfractures of the Eocene Xiaganchaigou Formation in a horizontal thin s... Available to Purchase
in The influence of fracture cements in tight Paleogene saline lacustrine carbonate reservoirs, western Qaidam Basin, northwest China
> AAPG Bulletin
Published: 01 November 2012
Figure 20 Microfractures of the Eocene Xiaganchaigou Formation in a horizontal thin section from the B2 well, Shizigou oil field. The host rock is lacustrine limestone; depth, 4122.8 m (13,526.2 ft). Early fractures filled with calcite and gypsum have been broken by neotectonic uplift
Image
(A) Regional seismic section I and (B) related geological interpretation, s... Available to Purchase
in Impact of multiple weak layers on deformation of the interior of Qaidam Basin, northern Tibetan Plateau
> GSA Bulletin
Published: 04 April 2024
Figure 4. (A) Regional seismic section I and (B) related geological interpretation, showing that, in addition to steep basement-involved faults, décollement folds and faults are common and associated with a major décollement in the Upper Xiaganchaigou Formation and a minor one in the Lulehe
Image
Field photographs of lithofacies and stratigraphic units at the Dahonggou s... Open Access
in Growth of the Qaidam Basin during Cenozoic exhumation in the northern Tibetan Plateau: Inferences from depositional patterns and multiproxy detrital provenance signatures
> Lithosphere
Published: 01 February 2016
and mudstone. Sandstone package thickness and frequency increase upward. Xiaganchaigou Formation, 1940 m. (C) Structureless, red and green mottled mudstone. 1–10 cm beds of ripple cross-stratified and horizontally laminated fine-grained sandstone increase in thickness up to a sharp contact with trough cross
Image
Field photographs of lithofacies and stratigraphic units at the Dahonggou s... Open Access
in Growth of the Qaidam Basin during Cenozoic exhumation in the northern Tibetan Plateau: Inferences from depositional patterns and multiproxy detrital provenance signatures
> Lithosphere
Published: 01 February 2016
and mudstone. Sandstone package thickness and frequency increase upward. Xiaganchaigou Formation, 1940 m. (C) Structureless, red and green mottled mudstone. 1–10 cm beds of ripple cross-stratified and horizontally laminated fine-grained sandstone increase in thickness up to a sharp contact with trough cross
Image
( continued ). (A) Isopach map of the Lulehe Formation (E1+2). (B) Isopach ... Available to Purchase
in Cenozoic tectonic evolution of the Qaidam basin and its surrounding regions (Part 3): Structural geology, sedimentation, and regional tectonic reconstruction
> GSA Bulletin
Published: 01 July 2008
Figure 12. ( continued ). (A) Isopach map of the Lulehe Formation (E1+2). (B) Isopach map of the lower Xiaganchaigou Formation (E3-1). (C) Isopach map of the upper Xiaganchaigou Formation (E3-2). (D) Isopach map of the Shanggan-chaigou Formation (N1). (E) Isopach map of the Xiayoushashan
Image
Comparison diagram of the thickness-distance ( T - D ) plots and correspond... Open Access
in Cenozoic tilting history of the south slope of the Altyn Tagh as revealed by seismic profiling: Implications for the kinematics of the Altyn Tagh fault bounding the northern margin of the Tibetan Plateau
> Geosphere
Published: 01 June 2016
the tendencies of the T-D curves during the stages of the Upper Xiaganchaigou–Xiayoushashan formations and the Shangyoushashan–Shizigou formations, respectively. 1—Lulehe Formation (LLH); 2—Lower Xiaganchaigou Formation (LXG); 3—Upper Xiaganchaigou Formation (UXG); 4—Shangganchaigou Formation (SG); 5
Image
Sketches showing the deposition of the three décollement layers and the ass... Available to Purchase
in Impact of multiple weak layers on deformation of the interior of Qaidam Basin, northern Tibetan Plateau
> GSA Bulletin
Published: 04 April 2024
such as the Alar, Niuzhong, and Niubei faults became active, creating some subbasins within the basin (B1). The fine-grained mudstone with evaporites of the Upper Xiaganchaigou Formation was deposited in a subbasin confined by basement faults (B2). After fast burial by subsequent deposition of the Shangganchaigou
Image
Stratigraphy, lithologic unit descriptions, sedimentary facies, and source–... Available to Purchase
Published: 15 March 2019
the entire basin. Source–reservoir–cap rock assemblages are adapted from Zeng et al. (2012) . E 1+2 l = Lulehe Formation; E 3 1 xg = Lower Xiaganchaigou Formation; E 3 2 xg = Upper Xiaganchaigou Formation; J 1+2 d = Dameigou Formation; J 3 c = Caishiling Formation; Kq = Quanyagou Formation; N 1 sg
Image
Ternary diagrams of sandstone petrographic data. Light-gray arrow highlight... Open Access
in Growth of the Qaidam Basin during Cenozoic exhumation in the northern Tibetan Plateau: Inferences from depositional patterns and multiproxy detrital provenance signatures
> Lithosphere
Published: 01 February 2016
Figure 10. Ternary diagrams of sandstone petrographic data. Light-gray arrow highlights an up-section decrease in maturity between the Shangganchaigou and Xiaganchaigou Formations, followed by a return to more mature sandstone compositions between the Xiaganchaigou and Shangyoushashan Formations
Image
Gridded isopach maps of the Cenozoic stratigraphic units. (A) Lulehe format... Open Access
in Cenozoic tilting history of the south slope of the Altyn Tagh as revealed by seismic profiling: Implications for the kinematics of the Altyn Tagh fault bounding the northern margin of the Tibetan Plateau
> Geosphere
Published: 01 June 2016
Figure 6. Gridded isopach maps of the Cenozoic stratigraphic units. (A) Lulehe formation (LLH). (B) Lower Xiaganchaigou formation (LXG). (C) Upper Xiaganchaigou formation (UXG). ATF—Altyn Tagh fault. Insets show the typical thickness-distance plot extracted from the corresponding isopach maps
Image
Gridded isopach maps of the Cenozoic stratigraphic units. (A) Lulehe format... Open Access
in Cenozoic tilting history of the south slope of the Altyn Tagh as revealed by seismic profiling: Implications for the kinematics of the Altyn Tagh fault bounding the northern margin of the Tibetan Plateau
> Geosphere
Published: 01 June 2016
Figure 6. Gridded isopach maps of the Cenozoic stratigraphic units. (A) Lulehe formation (LLH). (B) Lower Xiaganchaigou formation (LXG). (C) Upper Xiaganchaigou formation (UXG). ATF—Altyn Tagh fault. Insets show the typical thickness-distance plot extracted from the corresponding isopach maps
Image
Gridded isopach maps of the Cenozoic stratigraphic units. (A) Lulehe format... Open Access
in Cenozoic tilting history of the south slope of the Altyn Tagh as revealed by seismic profiling: Implications for the kinematics of the Altyn Tagh fault bounding the northern margin of the Tibetan Plateau
> Geosphere
Published: 01 June 2016
Figure 6. Gridded isopach maps of the Cenozoic stratigraphic units. (A) Lulehe formation (LLH). (B) Lower Xiaganchaigou formation (LXG). (C) Upper Xiaganchaigou formation (UXG). ATF—Altyn Tagh fault. Insets show the typical thickness-distance plot extracted from the corresponding isopach maps
Image
( a ) Rose diagrams of the paleocurrent indicators for the Lulehe Formation... Available to Purchase
in The middle Eocene to early Miocene integrated sedimentary record in the Qaidam Basin and its implications for paleoclimate and early Tibetan Plateau uplift
> Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences
Published: 11 March 2013
Fig. 3. ( a ) Rose diagrams of the paleocurrent indicators for the Lulehe Formation, Xiaganchaigou Formation, and Shangganchaigou Formation. ( b ) Hubs occurrence of the slump structure of the studied sedimentary sequence. N , number of samples.
Image
Representative seismic profile B–B′ across the northern Qaidam basin. (A) U... Available to Purchase
in Differential tectonic activity along the southern boundary of the Qilian Mountains: Insights from low-temperature thermochronology, seismic data, and fluvial geomorphology
> GSA Bulletin
Published: 26 November 2024
Formation; XG—Xiaganchaigou Formation; LL—Lulehe Formation; K—Cretaceous; J—Jurassic.
Image
Lithological composition of the salt layer shows the proportional variation... Available to Purchase
Published: 15 March 2019
Figure 4. Lithological composition of the salt layer shows the proportional variation of the three salt types with depth. E 3 2 xg = Upper Xiaganchaigou Formation.
Image
Stratigraphy of the Dahonggou Section of the Qaidam Basin, northeast Tibeta... Available to Purchase
in Establishing the modern-like differential climate of the Qaidam Basin, northeast Tibetan Plateau, since ca. 9 Ma: Implications of the effect of interactions between tectonics and atmospheric circles on paleoclimate
> GSA Bulletin
Published: 13 December 2024
—Shangyoushashan Formation; XYSS—Xiayoushashan Formation; SGCG—Shangganchaigou Formation; XGCG—Xiaganchaigou Formation.
Image
Structural cross section based on surface geology and seismic data. The lin... Available to Purchase
in The influence of fracture cements in tight Paleogene saline lacustrine carbonate reservoirs, western Qaidam Basin, northwest China
> AAPG Bulletin
Published: 01 November 2012
Figure 3 Structural cross section based on surface geology and seismic data. The line location is shown in Figure 1B . , Paleocene Lulehe Formation; , Eocene Xiaganchaigou Formation; , Oligocene Shangganchaigou Formation; , Miocene Xiayoushashan Formation; , Miocene Shangyoushashan
Image
(A) Uninterpreted and (B) interpreted versions of a three-dimensional seism... Available to Purchase
Published: 15 March 2019
Figure 8. (A) Uninterpreted and (B) interpreted versions of a three-dimensional seismic section across the northern Shizigou salt structure. See Figure 5 for location. E 3 2 = Upper Xiaganchaigou Formation; N 1 = Shangganchaigou Formation; N 2 1 = Xiayoushashan Formation.
1
